From: Neil Horman Subject: Re: should NLM locks send notifications after nfsd crash Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 07:58:08 -0500 Message-ID: <20050401125808.GC6555@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> References: <20050331131327.GB1328@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> <1112285953.12388.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20050401015641.GB5562@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> <16972.44651.280877.472381@cse.unsw.edu.au> <1112322501.11284.36.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Neil Brown , Neil Horman , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1DHLjJ-0002AD-SG for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 01 Apr 2005 04:58:29 -0800 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.41) id 1DHLjI-0004KG-B0 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 01 Apr 2005 04:58:29 -0800 To: Trond Myklebust In-Reply-To: <1112322501.11284.36.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 09:28:21PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > fr den 01.04.2005 Klokka 12:14 (+1000) skreiv Neil Brown: > > > Stopping the nfsd server threads does not, itself, cause a loss of > > locking state. > > However unexporting the filesystems does, and this often accompanies > > the stopping of the last thread. > > To be specific: > > If the last thread dies due to SIGHUP, or though an explicit setting > > of the number of threads to 0: > > rpc.nfsd 0 > > then the filesystems aren't unexported, and locking state remains. > > (unless you explicitly exportfs -avu) > > > > If the last thread dies due to any other signal (KILL, INT, QUIT), > > then the filesystems are explicitly unexported which will cause > > locking state to be lost. > > > Note also that if you do want to trigger a "reboot situation" and have > lockd go into a grace period, then you can do this by signalling the > lockd thread using "kill -9". Rather than causing the thread to > terminate, it will cause it to flush out all locks, and to call the > function set_grace_period(). > > It goes without saying that knfsd itself will not be affected by signals > to the lockd thread. > > Cheers, > Trond > > -- > Trond Myklebust > Understood. Thank you Neil, Trond! Neil -- /*************************************************** *Neil Horman *Software Engineer *Red Hat, Inc. *nhorman@redhat.com *gpg keyid: 1024D / 0x92A74FA1 *http://pgp.mit.edu ***************************************************/ ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by Demarc: A global provider of Threat Management Solutions. Download our HomeAdmin security software for free today! http://www.demarc.com/Info/Sentarus/hamr30 _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs